WIFE SEEKS COSTS ORDER AGAINST HUSBAND DUE TO UNREASONABLE CONDUCT OF HUSBAND DURING PROCEEDINGS
Tappert & Tappert (No 2) [2020] FCCA 3499 (23 December 2020)
This case involves the wife seeking for costs order against the husband by reason of the unreasonable conduct of the husband which increased the costs of litigation of the wife.
Facts:
The Applicant seeks that the Respondent pays the Applicant’s costs fixed in the sum of $61,982. The Wife has sought solicitor-client costs of the applications for disclosure and the costs of inspecting subpoenas ($42,344.29), 50% of the costs of the final hearing ($10,055.67), disbursements ($6819.72) and the costs of making this application for costs ($2763.05).
The Applicant submits that the Respondent took active steps to hide approximately $250,000, following being served with the originating application in this proceeding, for which he did not disclose or discover. The Respondent’s conduct was only discovered due to work done by the Applicant’s solicitor. The Respondent’s failure to make such discovery led to an increase in cost for the Applicant which should be given significant weight.
Adequate financial disclosure by the Respondent did not occur until approximately 10 months after the originating application. This led to further cost due to Respondent’s conduct and delay, which included the issuing and inspection of subpoenaed documents
Issue: Should the husband pay the wife for costs due to his conduct?
Law:
Analysis:
It is the court’s view that the Wife should receive 70% of the costs associated with the interim disclosure applications, being $29,641, and the costs of this application for costs, fixed in the sum of $2000. The Wife has put the expense of seeking to ascertain the asset pool in the face of nondisclosure by the Husband and by reason of the fact that $250,000 had been removed and hidden by the Husband. That removal of funds was discovered by the work of the Wife’s solicitor and, given the husband's uncooperative approach to all aspects of this litigation, the task would have been time-consuming and challenging. The applications before the Court were in large part necessitated by the conduct of the Husband.
However, parenting matters were also dealt with in the course of those applications and for that reason, the Court will not make orders for the entire sums claimed by the Wife. The court does not accept the Husband should bear 50% of the costs of the Final Hearing as there was nothing about how that hearing was conducted that added to the costs and the Husband was not wholly unsuccessful.
Conclusion: For these reasons, the Court will make orders that the Respondent Husband pay the Applicant Wife’s costs fixed in the sum of $31,641.00
